Oddly, when I use my best friend's digital camera, I look at the LCD simply because I feel the digital is "unpredictable." It's a Canon Powershot, not an SLR, and very inconvenient to control manually (menus and such; too much of a hassle for simple snap-shots). I'm sure an high-end digital SLR would be fine.
Because of the automation, and inconvenience in over-riding it, I have to check to make sure it captured what I intended and didn't do anything odd with the color and levels.

With film, I don't worry. I know it will come out fine. This is true with my SLR, or a point-and-shoot. No surprises like the typical consumer digital cameras.

Because they're trying desperately to preserve just about the last surviving online meeting place they can go to discuss their craft without being called idiots. That's where the anger you sense is coming from. Not from a sense of being unsure or self-conscious about analog itself.

They're attempting to flee from the hordes of d-evangelists who won't be satisfied until this final online film oasis is overrun. Apparently those other 999,999 d-sites are not enough for them. They want all 1,000,000.

The complaints are less about digital in general, and more about digital overrunning Sean's analog oasis.

Ken

I get that. But digital people aren't starting all these threads about digital. Analog people are.

I'm amazed that analog people care at all about what digital say, do or shoot. But they seem to because these threads are all rants about fn-digital.

Analog people have to be aware they are now an extremely small niche market. 25 years ago 100% of photography was probably analog. Now it's probably less than 5%.

So enjoy you uniqueness.

You don't get to be unique and special and be the same as everyone else.

Why not celebrate the fact that 95% of the photography world is the same and you're different.

Last edited by blansky; 03-15-2013 at 10:55 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Not surprising. Given the sky-darkening d-hordes, sometimes a visit to APUG is like a visit to Bodega Bay in 1963, and we're all huddled terrified in our sealed-off darkrooms listening to shattering glass and waiting for morning's first light...

Ken

"They are the proof that something was there and no longer is. Like a stain. And the stillness of them is boggling. You can turn away but when you come back they’ll still be there looking at you."

— Diane Arbus, March 15, 1971, in response to a request for a brief statement about photographs

That is good to know and thanks for explaining however reading your original posting twice again I still get the same message from your wording.

Yes. But remember, the original audience was not someone who would make the fine distinctions among photographic factions that we make here. Some have complained the message was way too long, and they are right. If I made the distinction you call for, it would have been even longer and less interesting.

“You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live.” - John Galt

Good Lord. What happened in Bodega Bay in 1963? Did Kerouac show up with a bong?

“You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live.” - John Galt

Actually, I have nothing against digital photography. My problem is I detest the behavior it requires - hours of sitting on my ass in front of a computer after having already sat on my ass in front of a computer for 30 years. However, I have grown to detest people who simply must tell me that sitting on my ass in front of a computer is so much better in every way than all the tactile wonderfulness I experience with film photography. Mollly was not doing that, only expressing amazement at finding somebody who both understands and enjoys film. And Molly is a wonderful young woman, intelligent, funny, very good at her job, and confident in a room full of men.

Playing the cranky old man, I find liberating - sort of living life as performance art.

I actually think sitting in front of computers for hours is a virtue of the digital system. I see nothing wrong with that. I don't like it when people complaining that you have to do too much post processing when shoot digital. Oh well I have to do much more post processing using film from developing my film to making prints. The digital system allow most people to do post processing themselves unlike in film where most people can't do the processing themselves, I love film. I do not resent the digital. May be the only thing against it is that its popularity making manufacturers stop making film.